UPDATE: The Lethal Shot that announced the End of Democracy in Namibia

On 27 August 2014 Frieda Ndatipo was shot dead when a group of protesters clashed with police officers in front of Swapo head  office in Windhoek. You can read more about that and watch the video HERE
After a public outcry then Prime Minister Dr. Hage Geingob instructed the Ombudsman to carry out an impartial investigation into the incident. The Ombudsman's report was handed to Justice Minister Albert Kawana in December 2014. It was not made public.
It took another 4 months before prosecutor general Martha Imalwa decided NOT to prosecute anyone in this case. 
Now Minister Kawana has requested an inquest to be held, as we are told HERE 

The very fact that a)it took 7 months to come to the decision of b)NO prosecution proves that something is very wrong here. 

Allowing the police to carry and use live ammunition on their own initiative is a violation of Article 6 of the Namibian Constitution, which forbids the death penalty and executions.   Allowing them to open fire at demonstrators once again violates Article 17. 

The decision of the prosecutor general to NOT prosecute anyone in this case is either a sign of gross incompetence or an acknowledgement of the fact that we now live in a police state.

A Lethal Shot Announces the End of Democracy in Namibia

On the very day parliament passed the third Amendment of the Namibian Constitution, police fired on a  demonstrating crowd, killing Frieda Ndatipo, a young mother of three.

As one commenter puts it:"The needless killing of this young woman in front of Swapo HQ is tragic and also highly symbolic of the real state of affairs. It marks the bloody end of an era of hope and the beginning of a new phase of struggle in which Swapo will no longer be the automatically regarded as 'the sole and authentic representative of the Namibian people', but as a dangerous agency prepared to shoot down unarmed women. The death of this protester on 27 August 2014 will mark a turning-point in the political orientation of the youth and in their struggle for equal rights."

Now I am asking: is ALLOWING the use of live ammunition against demonstrators in a country that A) forbids executions(Art.6) and B)expressly allows peaceful political activities(Art.17) not a contradiction in itself? Especially when acknowledging that people can panic in certain situations?

Of course the SWAPO government immediately puts the blame on someone else once again, claiming a third force being involved in this shooting and their supporters of course start parroting Hage Geingob's words.

Seeing that Namibia has no independent institution to investigate this incident, it will just be swept under the carpet like so many other incidents. 

Namibian Police again violate the Constitution in public

It has become normal practice for the Namibian Police to violate the rights of the inhabitants. With the recent visit of UN Secretary General, Ban Ki-Moon, to Namibia, the police once again openly demonstrated their absolute disdain for the
Namibian Constitution, the Supreme law of the land.

According to a media report they threw a community activist into a police van in full view of the public. I have personally seen that kind of action on a previous occasion, when a police officer literally threw my grandson into the back of his van without him having shown any resistance at all. The officer just told him to get out of the car and as soon as he did that, the officer grabbed him, threw him into the van and drove off, no explanation, no reading of rights, nothing. I and my granddaughter were so shocked, we could barely drive the car back to the police station. We were too shocked to even think of laying a charge against that officer right away. Reading that media report now, nearly two years after our incident, the whole episode once again comes alive and puts me in psychological turmoil.

It is an open violation of our right to dignity as stipulated in Article 8(2) of the Namibian Constitution. It is also a violation of article 11(1). Now I am asking: how can the Namibian police force be allowed to violate our Supreme law in that way without any repercussions? isn't it a clear sign that our Constitution is no longer the supreme law of the land? Isn't it a clear sign that the ruling party, SWAPO, does not recognize and uphold our Constitution as they are supposed to?
The situation being as it is, it is our civil duty as inhabitants of the country to hold our civil servants accountable for their actions. If they don't protect and uphold the Constitution, we the people have the duty to do it in order to stay a free country. We have to know, claim and defend our rights in order to live as a free people.

Is the Namibian Police incompetent or biased?

Details of the case:
On Tuesday 15 April 2014 somebody stole the pet parrot of Sakkie, my helper, out of it's cage in Sakkies house in Nau-Aib, Okahandja. After talking to his neighbors Sakkie found out who had stolen the parrot. So on Wednesday morning he went to the Okahandja police station to open a case of theft against the thief, who is employed in the Namibian army in a nearby camp. He was told to come back in two hours.
Coming to work late, he told me about his predicament, attended to his job and was back at the police station two hours later, only to find out that nothing had happened in the meantime. He did not turn up for work on Thursday, as the police had told him to wait there, since they had no car available to drive to the army camp. 

When he turned up for work on Friday, a public Holiday, I found out that no case had been opened and still nothing had been done to apprehend the thief. So I decided to accompany him to the police in order to get more details about why nothing had been done yet.

Five officers where behind the counter. All of them began to verbally attack Sakkie, telling him he hadn't made a case, only a report and he hadn't waited there as told and hadn't informed them when he left to get some lunch. I said we were here to now open a case, not report. Upon that we were again told to wait. 
After waiting for about 20 minutes, the traffic cop with the car came in to tell me I should drive ahead, he would catch up with me along the road as he was driving very fast. I did as I was told, waiting somewhere along the road again for half an hour, as the car wasn't coming as expected. Eventually they sped past me hooting and I followed them to the army camp.

On arrival at the camp, the traffic cop and police officer walked to the barracks accompanied by an army officer, then returned to tell us the guy wasn't there since it was a Public Holiday. Another army officer came up to us to get the story, then walked to their hospital, where the guy was supposed to work, but he wasn't there either. 

The police officer told the army officer that we were going to open a case and then he would just have to take the guy into custody. We came here to give the guy a chance to state his side and give back the stolen bird. The army officer then took our telephone numbers and said he would come back to us.

We then returned home, while the police and traffic cop drove off in a different direction. Right up to today, Sunday 20 April 2014, the case is wrapped in silence.

Analysis:
1. A theft was reported, but no criminal docket was opened.

2. The plaintiff was not informed of procedures to be followed.
3. The plaintiff was put on hold for 2 days.
   
This is a clear case of not taking complaints seriously, thereby promoting criminality in Namibia. 

4. Plaintiff is openly portrayed as the guilty partner in this case for not  having followed instructions from police to wait.

This is a clear indication of a guilty conscience for not following proper procedures in a criminal case.

5. Without any official docket a trip of 30km was undertaken on public cost.
6. This trip was undertaken on a Public Holiday, meaning double pay.

This is a clear case of misuse of public funds. 

7. The time delay gave the alleged criminal ample opportunity to get rid of any evidence.

This is a clear case of complicity with suspect and bias toward other officials.  

8. This case still has not been officially docketed. 

Conclusion:
The Namibian police in Okahandja are not only incompetent but also abetting criminality in the country by their flat refusal to record complaints properly. 

This is further mentioned by LAC as reported by Refworld.


Update 6 May: According to Sakkie, the alleged thief in the meantime paid him the price of the bird plus an additional amount for Sakkies emotional hurt, after Sakkie had put his case before the military police at Ozona.